What's new
By:

Paul Ryan for the Bush Stimulus

northeast said:
Criminal Lawsuits are expensive and tough to prove.
We could have just stopped dumping truckloads of cash in their vaults.
What's the point of bailing them out to prop them up, and then suing them to drive them back into bankruptcy?
Click to expand...

I agree! (emphasis on I can't believe it)

I was angry when banks took the money, executive bonuses were issued, and then no loans were being granted. Old news, now, and I'm sure if Obama were given a do-over, he would do things a bit differently. Wouldn't we all..
 
TheSilencer1313 said:
I don't believe he would at all.
He's said in multiple instances that the bailouts were the right thing to do.

https://www.politico.com/politico44...o-rescue-with-every-manufacturing-131566.html

https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.c...hreatens-to-do-the-same-for-other-industries/

https://static.mhpbooks.com/2012/07/homer-doh.jpg
Click to expand...

Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would not allow bailout money to be used by executives to bonus themselves. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would see that those taking stimulus monies were held accountable to actually stimulate the economy (i.e. make loans).
 
PKM said:
Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would not allow bailout money to be used by executives to bonus themselves. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would see that those taking stimulus monies were held accountable to actually stimulate the economy (i.e. make loans).
Click to expand...

The pissed off taxpayer in me wants to see the execs that received bonuses from stimulus money brought up on charges.
 
northeast said:
Criminal Lawsuits are expensive and tough to prove.
We could have just stopped dumping truckloads of cash in their vaults.
What's the point of bailing them out to prop them up, and then suing them to drive them back into crisis mode?
Click to expand...

NO I'm talking about real criminal lawsuits for the likes of Paulson, Geitner, and Bernake for pushing for deregulations for their former companies to destroy the financial sector for huge gains. I'm not talking wasting time and moving a nonsensical lawsuit to the Supreme Court like the Obamacare constitutionality garbage that cost us and wasted time in the courts.
 
PKM said:
Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would not allow bailout money to be used by executives to bonus themselves. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he would see that those taking stimulus monies were held accountable to actually stimulate the economy (i.e. make loans).
Click to expand...

Haha well...... I'd say after 4 years, the "giving him the benefit of the doubt period" has just about reached whits end.
 
Stoked said:
The pissed off taxpayer in me wants to see the execs that received bonuses from stimulus money brought up on charges.
Click to expand...

Yes. And one is a friend of mine. His bank was failing (HUGE) and he took bailout money and bonused himself .. bank is no longer open.
 
TheSilencer1313 said:
Haha well...... I'd say after 4 years, the "giving him the benefit of the doubt period" has just about reached whits end.
Click to expand...

I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt on the go-forward .. just suggesting he may have learned something from his first-term oopsies.
 
PKM said:
Yes. And one is a friend of mine. His bank was failing (HUGE) and he took bailout money and bonused himself .. bank is no longer open.
Click to expand...

Do me a solid? Tell him I hope he is mounted by a pack of rabid dogs.
 
Stoked said:
The pissed off taxpayer in me wants to see the execs that received bonuses from stimulus money brought up on charges.
Click to expand...

Looking back on it now, how would you have required regulations to include some sort of claw back requirement?

PKM said:
I feel the same way. He bonused himself $980,000 as he closed the doors.
Click to expand...

What did the FDIC have to say about this? I owned stock in a small NW bank that had TARP money forced upon it, along with very strict requirements & consent orders. Screwing the FDIC out of funds is not a smart thing to try doing.
 
franklin said:
Looking back on it now, how would you have required regulations to include some sort of claw back requirement?



What did the FDIC have to say about this? I owned stock in a small NW bank that had TARP money forced upon it, along with very strict requirements & consent orders. Screwing the FDIC out of funds is not a smart thing to try doing.
Click to expand...

I simply would have written in that no bonuses of any kind to anyone can be given from this taxpayer money. I know my wanting charges is a purely pissed off thing and will never happen. It is just crap.
 
franklin said:
Looking back on it now, how would you have required regulations to include some sort of claw back requirement?



What did the FDIC have to say about this? I owned stock in a small NW bank that had TARP money forced upon it, along with very strict requirements & consent orders. Screwing the FDIC out of funds is not a smart thing to try doing.
Click to expand...

As far as clawbacks, are you asking what should have been done then or what could be done now?
 
So Ryan is a giant flip flopper. He fits right in perfectly on the ticket.

He can be the yin to Romneys yang. Spin them in circles, and they'll always have you covered.
 
Stoked said:
I simply would have written in that no bonuses of any kind to anyone can be given from this taxpayer money. I know my wanting charges is a purely pissed off thing and will never happen. It is just crap.
Click to expand...

The exec in my example claimed his bank had a net worth of $1,000,000 and that the money he was bonused was not the bailout funds, per se. Crap, but that's what he claimed.
 
PKM said:
The exec in my example claimed his bank had a net worth of $1,000,000 and that the money he was bonused was not the bailout funds, per se. Crap, but that's what he claimed.
Click to expand...

Oh I am sure they all found a way to cover themselves. Just pisses me off to see all the execs getting bonuses right after bailouts.
 
PKM said:
Too much discussion of absolutes. Drives me crazy when republicans state (broadly) that Obama was a complete disaster. Equally drives me crazy when he is cast in the light of a savior. Purely partisan arguments/points of view, are all manure.
Click to expand...

He's a communist! A muslim!

They're always dumbing things down to appeal to their base. Which begs the question why on earth are you apart of that base PKM?!
 
PKM said:
As far as clawbacks, are you asking what should have been done then or what could be done now?
Click to expand...

In regards to what stipulations would you like to have been in place back then that would potentially protect against this sort of thing going forward. Money is fungible & this stuff gets complex. I don't think an optimal solution exists.

PKM said:
The exec in my example claimed his bank had a net worth of $1,000,000 and that the money he was bonused was not the bailout funds, per se. Crap, but that's what he claimed.
Click to expand...

He better hope the FDIC doesn't catch wind of him sucking out $1,000,000 right before they seized him. The FDIC is one of the only top-notch organizations inside our government (the Federal Reserve being another), & I have full confidence in their decision making abilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top